1,129
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 170:
Line 170: + +
Talk:Examples of Bias in Wikipedia (view source)
Revision as of 19:42, April 3, 2007
, 19:42, April 3, 2007→Ratio (again)
::: It's self-evident that the number of conservatives in a population is going to effect its degree of "liberal bias." Your attempt to ignore it is like trying to determine the pH of a solution by looking only at acid OR base added, not both.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:31, 3 April 2007 (EDT)
::: It's self-evident that the number of conservatives in a population is going to effect its degree of "liberal bias." Your attempt to ignore it is like trying to determine the pH of a solution by looking only at acid OR base added, not both.--[[User:Aschlafly|Aschlafly]] 15:31, 3 April 2007 (EDT)
:::: Problems with the ratio. It is self selected. Do ''you'' have a conservative user tag on Wikipedia on your account? Conservative doesn't, nor does Ed. Being self selected it is not a random sampling. A raw count includes multiple duplicates - a look at [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Liberal_Wikipedians] shows "User:Ashley Y", "User:Ashley Y/Userbox/Liberal" and "User:Ashley Y/Userboxes/Politics". Are you counting this person three times? You are also discounting moderates [http://www.harrisinteractive.com/harris_poll/index.asp?PID=548] shows 41% of the American population are identified as moderate. Compare this to 36% and 18% being conservative and liberal. If you want to compare it to the pH, then you need to look at how many hydrogen ions are in the solution compared to the total amount of the solution. I will point out that American Association for Public Opinion Research would not endorse a self selected poll[http://www.aapor.org/pdfs/2006/samp_err_stmt.pdf]. --[[User:Mtur|Mtur]] 15:42, 3 April 2007 (EDT)
== Re: #6 (Great Flood) ==
== Re: #6 (Great Flood) ==